Search results

Geographic periphery regions are the focus of sustainable regional development research, with ongoing discussions on core–periphery relationships to address economic disadvantage and remoteness. However, periphery regions face challenges due to the high efficiency of core regions. Tourism provides an alternative economic landscape, revitalizing stagnant sectors and driving strategic exploration. The Sino-Russian border, spanning 4,209 km, represents a periphery where tourism plays a vital role. This chapter views Sino-Russian cross-border tourism through the lens of the core–periphery model, suggests two conceptual models of developing experiential cores in the cross-border areas of geographic peripheries, and argues for peripheries' potential to become sustainable experiential cores post COVID-19.

Cooperation in agriculture and agricultural products trade is a new driving force for Sino-Russian cooperation in economy and trade in recent years. Driven by the interests and needs of both countries, a Free Trade Zone (FTZ) on the Chinese territory facing Russia, the Heilongjiang FTZ, has been established, and agricultural cooperation has attracted much attention within the FTZ framework. This chapter aims to analyze and explain the prospects of Sino-Russian agricultural cooperation under the framework of the Heilongjiang FTZ based on the current situations of cooperation. The author concludes that the Heihe and Suifenhe Areas in Heilongjiang FTZ are developed with a focus on Sino-Russian agricultural cooperation. This chapter is innovative because it combined the traditional research perspective on Sino-Russian agricultural cooperation with that under the FTZ framework. The author thinks that to facilitate the cooperation between the two countries in agriculture under the FTZ, the two governments must cooperate more extensively. Besides, they need to discuss the establishment of infrastructures like a joint agricultural product R&D centre and a digital development centre for agriculture. Meanwhile, the schemes of dispute settlement and risk-sharing should be addressed as well.

What is the historical, normative and institutional setting that helps leading Latin American and Eurasian countries to implement a post-hegemonic agenda and contribute to the multipolarization of global politics? Post-hegemony describes a situation in which the unipolar organization of the world political economy is challenged by a plurality of alternative projects, without however being entirely replaced by another system. Emblematic of post-hegemonic initiatives is the rise of the Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa countries who have taken the lead in creating alternative institutions that constrain US global hegemony, while however failing to spearhead a coherent, uniform and confrontational opposition movement. Regarding post-hegemonic regionalism, Latin American regionalism – as represented by Bolivarian Alliance for Our America (ALBA) – is characterized by a social justice-driven agenda that refutes US neoliberal hegemony, whereas the peculiarity of Eurasian regionalism – as represented by Shanghai Cooperation Organization – lies in its security-oriented focus that confronts US interventionism and international terrorism. An underlying commonality of both Latin American and Eurasian experiences is that they constitute a multi-front struggle centered on four main areas: culture, economy, financial cooperation, and regional defense. They both hinge on a strong normative framework and firm commitment in the regionalization of an endogenous culture, educational cooperation, and defense system. They all accord primary importance to social, financial, and infrastructural development. Overall, these experiences suffer from unresolved tensions between national sovereignty and supranationalism alongside the predominance of charismatic leaders inhibiting institutionalization. The limitations and contradictions of post-hegemonic transformations also include Latin America’s inability to resolve the question of extractivism, Eurasia’s neglect of the question of democratic participation, and both regionalism’s failure to offer a coherent alternative model of economic development to US hegemonism.

Despite enacting numerous legislations, policies and practices accommodating third country nationals, Europe continues to erect a fortress against foreigners. The recent migration crisis on the shores of the Mediterranean seem to validate this view. As Europe searches for optimal solutions to the migration crisis, recent media and humanitarian organisation reports of surging African and Middle Eastern refugees and migrants bring into sharp focus and test these immigration measures. For this cause, the purpose of this paper is to interrogate European Union (EU)-Africa relationships on international migration issues.

Located in the evolving field of border studies, the paper employs the concepts of displacement and humanitarianism in an effort to frame the EU-Africa relations on migration in the context of borders, boundaries and frontiers. A thorough review and critical analysis of relevant legislations, literature and media reports on the Africa-Europe migration interface is also conducted.

The militarisation, securitisation, restrictive and, sometimes, draconian immigration regimes do not provide sustainable solutions to the migration crisis facing Europe. A rethinking around the integration and inclusion of immigrants into Europe's socioeconomic fabric, and addressing fundamental and structural weaknesses in EU-Africa relationships and respective economies is essential.

Theoretically, the paper attempts to understand better, the way the EU and Africa engage each other on international migration issues, in the context of border studies. Empirically, the paper positions itself in policy engagements and the quest for practical solutions by the two continents in view of the migration crisis currently facing Europe.

The Northeast of the People's Republic of China is now termed the “rustbelt” of the country: there is a need to reform and restructure enterprises in the region. China's major industrialization is underway elsewhere, with factories located in coastal area and primarily oriented towards exports into global markets. In the meantime the original primary industrial base in Northeast has been almost been forgotten.

This preliminary mapping and tentative analysis of the Chinese rustbelt is based on intensive field interviews in three major cities in Northeast China – Dalian, Changchun and 1Harbin. The empirical results are complemented with official statistics and other government information. This research paper is a first attempt to take stock of the remaining technological and industrial structures that exist in the area and how they can become revitalized to service the overall economy.

This paper provides a preliminary examination of the possibility of using the region's strong higher education base to develop new high technology industries. It argues that this is a possible option for the future.

The information and analysis provides insights into a region of China not well‐known to the rest of the world, which has many challenges, but also many opportunities.